Saturday, December 11, 2010

The New Hysteria - No Cooling in Sight

“global temperatures will probably be generally flat for about another 18 years”

Other than the laughable propagandists at GISS, the alarmists seemingly agree. Gone are the predictions of an inexorable march of decade over decade warming. Instead, the new propaganda reads more like this quote:

“There is no plausible scenario in which (the Northwest) cools over the next 40 years”

I say 18 years, Dr. Mote says 40 years. But, it is implicit that we both agree we can anticipate at least 18 more years (on top of the previous 15 years) without any warming. The alarmists imply that man made global warming will then resume -- not bloody likely.

Common sense, peer reviewed science, historical evidence (and the AMO cycle) suggests we will see about 18 additional years of little or no temperature trend followed by decades of below average temperatures (and global cooling hysteria mongering). DUH!

13 comments:

Cooling, should it occur is far more dangerous than warming. There is a substantial risk depending on solar activity of "little ice ages" which have occured repeatedly in human history and before. Much depends on the rate of ocean turn-over; however this appears to be harder to understand than cosmic ray induced low cloud formation.

Judging from the "Al Gore Effect" we are definitely headed for another Dalton Minimum at least; and this is better science than the preponderance of what has been available at massive cost for the last 25 years.

All available evidence does -- indeed -- indicate that warming is, on balance, beneficial and cooling is disastrous. In terms of human lives, warming is proven to be beneficial by a ratio of 121.4 to 1.

We will, no doubt, see another Dalton Minimum at some point. The question is when. I personally don't expect it within the next 30 years. But, I could be wrong.

Yes, I have multiple personalities; or is my trigger finger just unreliable? Who can say.

The main point is this only: US government cannot run science; ergo it cannot fund science. World government is totally ridiculous. "That government is best, which governs least." Local government can make building zones; larger government cannot. Just this single main point, has been or should have been driven home by Al Gore et al.

This is the only blog I would propose such a comment. Which is from me a supreme compliment.

I think the UK would love to have some warming this winter. 35,000 cold related deaths in NOT a small number. I have not heard any warmist say that this coldest ever winter in the UK is caused by man-made global warming.

Yes, the data you link to are consistent with everything I have ever published, especially with respect to the temperature trends of the lower 48 states.

That said, the lower 48 are already in another cooling trend. You can click here and here for more on that.

From either link, you can also link to the NOAA page from which you can confirm the domestic cooling trend from roughly 1940 to 1979. Of course, one must also remember that the NOAA data demonstrably contain a warming bias of about 30%.

A charting of annual means from 1930 to 1960 shows an absolute flat line temperature trend (coincident with the AMO plateau). But, a charting of annual means from 1930 to 1979 shows a rather sharp decline (coincident with the AMO decline from about 1960 to 1979). If one were to compare that period to our current condition, we are at about 1942. That would suggest a flat temperature trend for about another 18 years. At that point, temperatures will likely decline rather sharply (globally).

NOAA reports 1934 as the third warmest year domestically. After one considers the peer reviewed science documenting a 30% warming bias in the data, it is pretty certain that 1934 was actually the warmest year domestically.

I believe that -- for the overwhelming majority of the alarmists -- this was never about Global Warming or saving the planet. These thugs had one agenda and one agenda only -- the implementation of a centrally planned Socialist economy on a global scale.

In fact, at least one “expert” within the IPCC has freely admitted that the only real agenda was the forcible global redistribution of wealth.